Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
CNNW 3
CSPAN 2
CSPAN2 2
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 14
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
to the salafists and al qaeda, yeah. they are a muslim brotherhood government which is why morsi had the leverage to negotiate the cease-fire. >> mika, a lot of interesting things, talking about foreign policy going on here at home, talking about who the next secretary of state may be, john mccain said, along with lindsey graham and several others, who said they were going to fight susan rice tooth and nail, that sort of changed over the weekend, didn't it? >> that appears to be changing just a tad bit. heilmann, you wrote about it. senator mccain is softening his attacks on u.n. ambassador susan rice after vowing to block her potential nomination as secretary of state. republicans claim ambassador rice deliberately misled the country in the aftermath of the september 11th attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. but rice says that she's not to blame, arguing she relied on the talking points from the intelligence community. although mccain had threatened a senate filibuster earlier this month, he's now open to meeting directly with miss rice. >> is there anything that ambassador rice can do to c
under oath in front of congress that he had no idea how the words al-qaeda and other phrases were removed from the talking points that cia prepared and later were reinserted. he said he didn't know how that happened, and he put out a statement earlier this week saying it happened in his shop. those are two totally contradictory things he's saying. gregg: and by the way, it's a crime to lie to congress. but let me move on. the president's news conference last week, he said the people elected him to work with the other side and not to get into partisan fights. but, steve, if he nominates rice to be the next secretary of state, wouldn't that trigger a major partisan fight, and would he really do that when, after all, he's trying to reach a bipartisan deal to avoid the fiscal cliff? >> right. look, i would be surprised if the president put her forward given everything that we've seen. there were one or two scenarios, right? either she was, this was a tryout for her and she failed, or it was the case that they sent her out on purpose as the president suggested when he said they sent ou
without knowing exactly who they were, but we thought that is a signature of a known al-qaeda leader. then it morphed into unknown people and unknown possible militants there are guns down there. that's why we so often hit weddings because people in afghanistan and yemen bring guns to weddings and shoot them in celebration. then they say there is militant activity there they hit the wedding and many die. that is thoughtful, immoral and ridiculous. i'm not against all drone strikes. drone strikes can prevent full war instead. i'm not against that. but i'm against dumb, immoral counterproductive and lawless drone strikes. do you know not only do we do these signature strikes but we have executed u.s. citizens abroad with no trial whatsoever. that's not what this country is supposed to stand for. i'm not saying end the drone program. i'm saying at least at the very least put very stringent legal requirements so our executive branch is not acting outside of the law. by the way there is another word for that. it's called illegal. so they're not acting illegally in killing u.s. citizens an
. -- we knew that those with ties to al qaeda were involved. they knew by the 22nd that the information given to them was wrong, yet they have not cleared that up with the american people to date in saying they were wrong, including the president of the united states. host: the new hampshire senator went on to say she will block any clinton's successor, because she wants more information about the benghazi attacks. what is next on that front? since an individual senator can put a hold on a nomination. that could prevent this from going forward. we have seen this in previous cases. if we saw this in the bush and administration would john bolton. we have seen it in a couple of cases in the obama administration where nominee for a high government post was held up for a long time. it all depends in the end on whether kelly ayotte gets any allies from her fellow republicans on this, because the way you could overcome her individual opposition is to get about five republicans that the democrats would need to break any filibuster that she might muster. i suspect, based on what i've seen of the
carrier waits for the body of osama bin laden. it's may 2, 2011, the al qaeda leader has just been killed. two u.s. navy admirals use code words to describe bin laden. the commander says fed ex delivered the package, both trucks are safely on route home base. the e-mails heavily redakted have just been released by the defense department responding to a freedom of information act washdog. a few days earlier that strike dog asked do i need any special religious ceremonial preparations. after bin laden's buried at sea, an admiral describes the scene. tradition traditional procedures for islamic burial was followed. the deceased body was washed then placed in a white sheet then a military officer read prepared religious remarks which were translated into arabic. tipped up whereupon the deceased body slid into the sea. according to e-mails, there aren't many witnesses. in response to the question, any sailors watch the burial, burial, no sailors watched. and another says only a small group of the leadership was informed. less than a dozen total. and another indication of the secrecy of that pa
speaking out. james clapper saying he is the one who took out al qaeda talking points after originally saying he had no idea who did it. so who should we all believe here? joining us now is former cia covert operations officer mike baker live in boise idaho at 3:15 a.m. good to see you, mike. >> thank you. good to see you and thank you for the opportunity. >> what do we make of all of this after what susan rice has come out and said? she clearly relayed the intel given to her. should we expect a diplomat to do more than that. to go beyond and ask questions before relay ago story to the media. >> well, right. not just a diplomat but the person that president obama claims would be a perfect secretary of state to replace secretary clinton. ambassador rice is stying five days after the attack. now it's three mons on from the attack and we are still kind of around with the potential investigation. getting people in to testify. but ambassador rice is saying five days after the attack all she did, at the behest of the white house was go on the sunday morning talk show circuit and rely entirel
took out al-qaeda talking points after originally saying he had no idea who did it. so who should we really believe? maybe santa can help us. nope. instead we got michael goodwin. you can find his columns in the "new york post" and fox news. who is telling the truth and who is lying? >> look, you ask who we should believe? i think no one. that's the whole point of putting people under oath. then supposedly get the truth or we get perjury. i believe susan rice had to know better before she made those comments. i just recently reread president obama's speech to the u.n. where there is no question he is saying the video did it. all of that was false. they all had reason to know it was false. clapper is just a clown. i mean, he does this all the time. and the idea that james clapper can take responsibility for making the changes, why isn't president obama furious at him? why doesn't president obama fire him today if the president really believed that clapper made a huge mistake? >> gretchen: that's a loaded question because as director of national intelligence to say one thing and then s
facing the united states. he didn't say al qaeda. he didn't say a rising china, iran or north korea. what he said was the deficit in the state of american society. i think that's exactly right. you can look at questions of the budget. you can look at questions of infrastructure. immigration policy. but above all, education policy. this is the future. we're not talking about her physical infrastructure. and joel klein is someone who's given his most recent phase of his multi-career when he discovers the best restaurants in brooklyn, is focused on improving a lot of young people in this country. it's supposed to be the other way around. so i'm going to tell you how condi has been dedicated to this issue. a year and a half ago i called her up and said convy, i want you to do some thing for me and with me. she said richard coming to b.c. don't even start. i said okay. i said before the end of this conversation come you're going to agree with going to ask you. and she said no way. i said with the council on foreign relations and all of our time working on things like china and mexico and all t
that the cia drafted those talking points. the dni, director of national intelligence removed the word al qaeda. they said it came from classic information. it's a tightly and it might influence the investigations. >> republicans will probably not be satisfied by rice's explanations. >> reporter: i would think not at this point because i don't think she really moves the ball from what we understood and that is what the administration has been saying. she was given this information by the intelligence community and that she repeated it and that there was no intention to mislead. it hasn't been accepted by the republicans yet and we'll just have to see where they go. one of the most interesting ones will be the stay department investigation perhaps in december and will really wrap things up. >> all right. after stuffing yourself with turkey today maybe you'll work it off by getting caught up in the black friday shopping frenzy which starts early this year. employees at stores like target want their holiday. more than one person is wondering why you want want to leave your family at a red tag sale
-time, the state now is disconnected from reality. [inaudible] jump out at you. this was an al qaeda storm in the making. i'm very disappointed in our intelligence community. i think they failed in many ways, but with a little bit of in cory and curiosity, i think it would be pretty clear -- inquiry into gaza, i think we pretty clear as related to a video that created a mod that turned into a riot was far a field. and at the end of the day we are going to get to the bottom of this. we have to have a system we can trust. and if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. people can push you to give explanations and you can say, i don't want to give bad information. here's what i can tell you. the american people got bad information on 16 september. they got bad information from president obama the days after, and the question is, should they have been giving the information at all? if you can do nothing but give bad information, it's better to give no information at all. so my belief is not only is the information bad, and i'm more convinced than ever that it was ba
. anybody looking at the threats, it would jump out at you that this was an al qaeda storm in the making. i'm disappointed in our intelligence community. i think they failed in many ways. but with a little bit of inquiry and curiosity i think it is pretty clear that to explain this episode as related to a video that created a mob that turned into a riot was far afield and at the end of the day, we're going to get to the bottom of this. we have to have a system we can trust, and if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. people can push you to give explanations and you can say, i don't want to give bad information. here's what i can tell you. the american people got bad information on 16 september. they got bad information from president obama days after. and the question is, should they have been giving the information at all? if you can do nothing but give bad information, isn't it better to give no information at all? my belief is, not only is the information bad, and i'm more convinced than ever that it was bad, it was unjustified to give the scenario as pres
references to al qaeda being involved. so another question for her would clearly be, who changed that, who decided not to include that, right? >> let's come to the second point. that she says she simply read these talking points and if that's true, really poses a much more fundamental question. why did she read the talking points? and it goes to a basic disagreement about how senior officials function in government. there are plenty of people, and i can same secretaries of state, who simply regurgitate what their bureaucracies produced for them, who relied on talking points. talking points were put in front of them and they read them. that is one way to approach government. that is not the way i approached government and got me in considerable trouble from time to time. if that is the way she approached it i think there is question whether from a point of view of judgment that is something that you want to see perpetuated. martha: talk about the politics of all of this for a moment because there's a reason that susan rice requested these meetings with these three senators. we know she is b
that seemed to play down the role of al qaeda terrorists on the attack in benghazi, libya. that attack killed four americans, including u.s. ambassador chris stevens. rice maintains that she made it very clear, the intelligence information she had at the time was preliminary. senators are threatening to block her nomination if president obama chooses her to be his next secretary of state. >>> president obama and vice president joe biden will meet with mexico's president-elect today. pena kneeate toe has a new message. in an editorial in "the washington post" he said the u.s./mexico relations need to go beyond drugs and security concerns. topping his list, deepening economic ties with the united states. >>> the remains of former palestinian leader yasser arafat were exhumed this morning from a mausoleum in the west bank. many palestinians believe that arafat was poisoned by israel when he died in 2004. now, an international team of scientists will analyze tissue samples to see if they contain any traces of a radioactive substance. the actual cause of arafat's death was never determined. >>> th
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)